THE Gay Marriage Argument

Ever really tire of homophobes? Every tire of repeating the same 10 arguments over and over and over again?  Well I compiled all my stances regarding gay marriage into a single response.   This way anytime i get a crappy homophobic chain letter or i come across some troll on the internet, rather than argue over and over again – i just link them to this (i’ve had it hosted elsewhere in the past)

I hope one day some of the points will sink in.

Part 1. – Homosexuality is Wrong

People choose to be gay so it’s wrong

Oh? Well when did you choose to be heterosexual? Regardless if homosexuality is genetic and due to nature, or if it’s due to environmental conditioning, or if someone just gets curious and CHOOSES to try a homosexual act people don’t choose what turns them on, they don’t choose who they have romantic feelings for.

But furthermore, why is choosing something vs being born a certain way make it anymore right or wrong?

Psychiatrists have proven that sexuality isn’t just a black and white thing as our religious moralities would have us believe.

Homosexuality is not Natural

1. First off human beings do a lot of stuff that’s not natural. Eating Velveeta’s chemical cheese isn’t natural, driving cars isn’t natural, neither is typing on a computer. But we do it. Being “natural” has little to do with being moral, as implied.
2. Every mammalian species displays homosexuality. Fruit flies can be turned gay by switching a gene on and off. I don’t know how much more natural you want to get. See The Gay Animal Kingdom and The Fabulous Kingdom of Gay Animals. Both of these dive into a number of species that display homosexual behavior.

Promiscuity, drug use, suicide and STD rates are all higher amongst homosexuals!

1. In regards to promiscuity, I see this as a 2 fold issue. But before I get to my points, let me express my feelings on promiscuity. Personally I have no problem with it. That’s right, none. As long as people are doing it for the right reasons and not to fill an emotional hole within themselves, and as long as people play incredibly safe, you won’t hear a peep out of me about it. But regardless of if they do or they don’t, it’s not anything we can really legislate away. That being said, when people are promiscuous for the wrong reasons, when they use sex and lust as a means to feel connected and intimate — rather than say .. love and romance, you will normally see that the person is depressed. And why wouldn’t a gay person be depressed? Many are still forced to live their lives completely in secret. When they “come out” sometimes their family’s disown them, their friends turn their backs on them, and angry mobs of people are busying roaming the country and the internet telling them how they are immoral and deserve to die just for being who they are. I don’t know about you, but if my life was like that I’d be quick to run to drugs and meaningless sex just to make my emotional pain go away too and I’m not too sure I’d be very responsible about it. Secondly, gay men are typically seen as the most promiscuous. Due to homophobia being a part of modern masculinity, I see gay men as more of an outcast than even lesbian women. At least lesbians in a hetero-normative way, are fantasized about in mainstream porn and Britney Spears videos. Gay men don’t even get that kind of exploitative exposure. Furthermore, men are taught that it’s more ok for us to boast about our sexual conquests. “Slut shaming” really doesn’t occur onto men, it is something that typically plagues the female gender. Not that I agree with slut shaming, but I do see this as a reason — at least for the perception that gay men might get it on a little more than everyone else. Promiscuity levels would go down, IMHO, once acceptance increases and once they are encouraged to have stable families and home lives ,rather than being shoved into the shadows of the world.
2. In regards to AIDs, AIDs/HIV is transmitted easiest via anal sex. Unfortunately this is a popular intercourse method of gay men. Diseases are really indiscriminate on who they attack, they don’t “punish” people for their actions. Sickle cell doesn’t punish blacks for being black, your flu bug isn’t punishing you because you lied to your parents over a bad report card. They are just a reality and prevention methods should be taken.
3. Lastly, straight people kill themselves, behave in promiscuous manners, they use drugs, they get STDs. It is fair to characterize all straight people on those who have these problems? No.

Part 2. Think of the Kids! (Gay Families)

Children shouldn’t be exposed to such an immoral and sexual lifestyle.

Beyond common belief, there’s a lot more to being gay than hanging out at some raunchy gay clubs and bathhouses. Do gays warn of the dangers of heterosexuality due to seedy BDSM clubs, swinger clubs, or strip clubs? No. Most hetero parents, from the straight laced and vanilla to the kinkiest of the kiniest, never exposed their children to their sex life, why would a gay parent? It is also incredibly unfair to view a orientation based on entertainment venues that promote the more promiscuous side of the orientation. Yes, there are “sluts” in the world: gay, straight, lesbian, bi, male and female. But the promiscuous members (or phases of some members) do not represent the entirety of an orientation. Nor does it even represent an individual at every period of their life. People do go through phases and settle down when they get older, generally. And the debate of promiscuity’s effects on society are really a whole other discussion all together.

Gays and lesbians can’t have children, so why do they want to get married or have families?

1. Straight couples sometimes choose not to have kids. Some straight couples can’t due to medical complications. Should they not be able to adopt? Should they not be able to get married if they can’t procreate?
2. There’s so many homeless kids right now part of orphanages and wards of the state, would you really deny these children a loving and caring home because of your hatred or fear of the way 2 people choose to love each other? Being raised by ‘the system’ where the child will probably not lead a productive life where he or she reaches their potential is preferable to having a loving home, just because you disagree with the orientation? Gimme a break.

But gays will only raise gay children!

Children raised by same-sex parents are not more likely to have same-sex orientations themselves

Part 3. It is against God and We are a Christian Nation

It is against God.

1. Jesus never once mentions a single thing to do with homosexuality. Amazing how homosexuality is mentioned so little in the Bible and other religious texts, yet how much the religious people tend to focus on it in comparison.
2. Most of the Old Testament verses that do comment on homosexuality comment on a great deal of other things no one pays attention to anymore. In the King James Version, Leviticus 18:22 is translated: “Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.” First off, the absurdity of this is hilarious. It comments on gay men, but not really about lesbians. But lets look at the other stuff Leviticus forbids. Leviticus forbids round haircuts (19:27), touching pig skin or eating pork (11:8), fortune telling (19:31) the punishment for which is exile (20:6), tattoos (19:28), wearing polyester or any fabric blends (19:19), and eating Shellfish (11:10). The Bible as a whole forbids a number of other ridiculous things people do everyday outside of Leviticus as well. Deuteronomy forbids your wife from defending your life in a fight by grabbing your attacker’s genitals. No joke. 25:11-12 states ” If two men, a man and his countryman, are struggling together, and the wife of one comes near to deliver her husband from the hand of the one who is striking him, and puts out her hand and seizes his genitals, then you shall cut off her hand; you shall not show pity.” Timothy forbids you to wear gold (2:9), Mark forbids divorce (10:8), Genesis forbids the “pulling out method” of birth control in (38:9-10). So why is it all this stuff gets ignored but homosexuality which is mentioned in the Bible a whopping 2 times, and NEVER by Jesus himself given so much time and attention by the religious. By the Jews, Christians and Muslims alike, but also the Hindu and other sects in the world? It is funny how the religious always treat their religions like a buffet line, picking and choosing which things to follow and believe in and which to reject. I’m so happy the followers of God think they’re smarter than God.
3. Which brings me to my 3rd point. Lets ignore Judaism and Islam and others for now. Lets just focus on Christianity since that’s the main political power in the US. How are you certain of what “God” intended? The oldest version of the Bible known as the Codex is far from complete. The Bible has been translated through the ages a 100 times over. There are more versions of the Holy Bible than you can count, all of them conveying very different interpretations of key verses. From these versions, multiple sects have arisen around a multitude of them and interpret them differently. The King James version alone is used by a number of protestant sects all with very different views on God. The church long ago threw away many many gospels that they deemed frauds, fake, or heretical. But it is suspected many gospels were tossed purely because they threatened the rising church’s power structure. From Rome to King James, the Bible has had verses simply added in, taken away and others completely reworded for nothing more than political reasons. And THIS…. this is the unchanging word of God that people use to protest other’s way of life? A historical document passed down from word of mouth for years before it got written down, which then had gospels tossed aside by the powers that be, which then suffered through a number of changes due to political and language translations, which in turn has inspired hundreds, if not thousands of intepretations of these words? Are you 100% certain that this is what God wants?

The US is a Christian nation.

Oh dear. Here we go.

1. Even IF that were so, my above comment about homosexuality being “against God” applies. How can you be sure of God’s intent? If the US is a Christian nation why don’t we stone farmers for planting 2 crops side by side as suggested in Leviticus? Slavery would still be legal as it is sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. Working on the Sabbath means people should be put to death, as explained in Exodus 35:2. Why don’t we legally sanction this? Hell, we can’t even agree as a human race which day the Sabbath actually falls on.
2. Lets start at something basic. “Jesus”, “God”, Lord, Savior, Heavenly Father, or any other Biblical reference for that matter is not mentioned in the Declaration of Independence or the Constitution. If the Founders intended for America to be a Christian nation, this is a fuckup of gigangtic proportions. How can you not mention a clear nod towards the Christian religions in Declaration or the Constitution by accident!?
3. The Declaration of Independence does mention a “Creator” as many religious folks like to point out. But this is an interesting case. First off Jefferson’s original Declaration included no reference to a Creator. 2ndly, the Declaration is not a legal document of this nation. What this means is that it has no authority over our laws, our lawmakers, or ourselves. It cannot be cited as precedent or as being binding in a courtroom. The purpose of the Declaration of Independence was to make a moral case for dissolving the legal ties between the colonies and Great Britain; once that goal was achieved, the official role of the Declaration was finished. Thirdly, the Declaration refers to “Nature’s God,” “Creator,” and “Divine Providence.” These are all terms used in the sort of Deism which was common among many of those responsible for the American Revolution as well as the philosophers upon whom they relied for support. Thomas Jefferson, the author of the Declaration of Independence, was himself a deist who was opposed to many traditional Christian doctrines, in particular beliefs about the supernatural. Historians pretty universally agree that these were mentions of a deist ‘creator’, not anything to do with Jesus Christ. Almost deism largely faded away during the rise of Darwinism as we started to gain an understanding how the origins of life on this world. Deism was largely rooted in logical reasoning, and generally rejected dogmatic religious practices or belief in the supernatural. The idea of a “creator” was purely philosophical and had no basis in any existing religion.
4. The 1st Amendment to the Constitution forbids Congress from making or enforcing any law that is in support of ANY religion. This is the primary law of the land: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances”
5. Just in case there was any further doubt, the Treaty of Tripoli further solidifies America as a secular nation: “As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Musselmen; and as the said States never have entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mehomitan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.” Hereis the actual document. It was ratified under John Adams.

But the founders of America were chrisitian!

1. First off, does this really matter? To decide that something is right or wrong because someone 200+ years ago said so is kind of ludicrous. Back then blacks were slaves, women couldn’t vote and children worked hard labor. The men who wrote the Constitution were smart enough to realize that times change and that’s why we are able to add Amendments to the Constitution. So regrardless of their intent, we should be deciding our reality today. Not trying to interpret what others may have wanted. They’re dead, they don’t matter.
2. Secondly, this depends on what you mean by “founders”. The majority of the people that came to America, were yes, Christians. A sizable portion were Christians fleeing religious persecution in Europe. I find it hypocritical and funny these people fled persecution only to come here to burn witches, enslave Africans, and commit genocide against the natives. Now their descendants are still persecuting other religions, homosexuals, atheists, artists and scientists when it doesn’t fit their world-view.
3. But most people refer to the “Founders” as in the “Founding Fathers”. We note George Washington, Franklin, Jefferson, Paine, Adams, etc.. While I’m not exactly for deciding our future based off the intentions of the Founders, here’s some choice quotes for you

Jefferson:

1. Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined and imprisoned; yet we have not advanced one inch towards uniformity. -Thomas Jefferson, Notes on Virginia, 1782
2. Question with boldness even the existence of a god; because if there be one he must approve of the homage of reason more than that of blindfolded fear. -Thomas Jefferson, letter to Peter Carr, August 10, 1787
3. Although Jefferson believed in a Creator, his concept of it resembled that of deism (the term “Nature’s God” used by deists of the time). With his scientific bent, Jefferson sought to organize his thoughts on religion. He rejected the superstitions and mysticism of Christianity and even went so far as to edit the gospels, removing the miracles and mysticism of Jesus (see The Jefferson Bible) leaving only what he deemed the correct moral philosophy of Jesus.
4. Thomas Jefferson’s “Wall of Separation” letter

John Adams

1. From a letter to Charles Cushing (October 19, 1756): “Twenty times in the course of my late reading, have I been upon the point of breaking out, ‘this would be the best of all possible worlds, if there were no religion in it.’”
2. From a letter to Thomas Jefferson: “I almost shudder at the thought of alluding to the most fatal example of the abuses of grief which the history of mankind has preserved — the Cross. Consider what calamities that engine of grief has produced!”
3. “Adams served as the sixth President of the United States from March 4, 1825, to March 4, 1829. He took the oath of office on a book of laws, instead of the more traditional Bible, to preserve the separation of church and state.”

James Madison

1. “Religion and government will both exist in greater purity, the less they are mixed together.”
2. Memorial and Remonstrance Against Religious Assessments: “Religious bondage shackles and debilitates the mind and unfits it for every noble enterprise….During almost fifteen centuries has the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial. What have been its fruits? More or less, in all places, pride and indolence in the clergy; ignorance and servility in laity; in both, superstition, bigotry, and persecution.”

Benjamin Franklin

1. From Franklin’s autobiography, p. 66: “My parents had given me betimes religious impressions, and I received from my infancy a pious education in the principles of Calvinism. But scarcely was I arrived at fifteen years of age, when, after having doubted in turn of different tenets, according as I found them combated in the different books that I read, I began to doubt of Revelation itself.”
2. “Lighthouses are more helpful than churches.”

Thomas Paine

1. From The Age of Reason, pp. 89: “I do not believe in the creed professed by the Jewish church, by the Roman church, by the Greek church, by the Turkish church, by the Protestant church, nor by any church that I know of….Each of those churches accuse the other of unbelief; and of my own part, I disbelieve them all.”
2. From The Age of Reason: “All natural institutions of churches, whether Jewish, Christian, or Turkish, appear to me no other than human inventions, set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power and profit.”
3. From The Age of Reason: “What is it the Bible teaches us? — rapine, cruelty, and murder.”

In closing for this section, even IF you wanted to use the Founding Fathers as a basis for how we should behave today, homophobes and those who stand against gays, would still be wrong in citing their religious perspectives as a supportive reasoning.

George Washington

1. “Religious controversies are always productive of more acrimony and irreconcilable hatreds than those which spring from any other cause. Of all the animosities which have existed among mankind, those which are caused by the difference of sentiments in religion appear to be the most inveterate and distressing, and ought most to be depreciated. I was in hopes that the enlightened and liberal policy, which has marked the present age, would at least have reconciled Christians of every denomination so far that we should never again see the religious disputes carried to such a pitch as to endanger the peace of society.” – letter to Edward Newenham, 1792
2. “Gouverneur Morris had often told me that General Washington believed no more of that system (Christianity) than did he himself.” -Thomas Jefferson, in his private journal, Feb. 1800

John Locke

He wrote “A Letter Concerning Toleration”, in which he argues there must be an absolute separation between church and state.

But the Pledge and our money says “in God we trust!”.

This does get tiresome doesn’t it?

1. The Pledge was written in 1892 by a socialist by the name of Francis Bellamy. The pledge did not have the words “under God” in it’s original version. It did not have the words “under God” added in until 40-50 years later.. People also used to salute the flag for the Pledge giving the Bellamy Salute., which most people today associate as the hand symbol to give a Heil Hitler.
2. In God We Trust, was also added to our currency at the same time (both of these actions were under Eisenhower) and both were McCarthyistic responses to the Cold War.. Communism was seen as inherently atheistic and adding religious symbolism to our nationalism seemed important at the time to right wing politicians.

Neither the Pledge, nor our money initially said anything about God or religion at all. They were only added as a way of mixing nationalism with religious devotion in a propaganda war against communists.

Part 4. Misc Reasons;

But they’re destroying the sanctity of marriage!?

1. So this is why the Bachelor and Bachelorette do so well? Because the nation is worried about the sanctity of marriage? This is why divorce rates are as high as 55% in some states? This is why Britney Spears can get a divorce 24 hours after being married? This must be why Anna Nicole Smith married a billionaire tycoon on the brink of death, because marriage is ‘sacred’.  Only if the Christians protested these people with the same passion would I believe them.
2. Or lets look at some of the biggest opponents to gay marriage like Newt and Rush, both of which make a joke out of marriage as an institution due to how many times both have been married and divorced.
3. Gay marriage in Canada has done nothing to diminish or harm anyone, but it has made all the difference in the world to make life easier by granting respect for human love. Gay marriage in Canada has not affected a single heterosexual relationship.

I don’t want them to raise my insurance premiums by allowing them to be married?

Being greedy has never been a reason to deny civil rights.

They are more likely to hurt themselves sexually and that will raise my premiums. Their high rates of STDs will too.

1. People already have gay sex, preventing their marriage doesn’t prevent gay sex.
2. Straight people have very dangerous sex, extreme sexual practices are not limited to an orientation. Furthermore the most dangerous thing gays might do, on average, is anal, which at worst could result in a prolapse or a hemorrhoid. So what? Straight people have anal sex too.

Homosexuality acceptance will pave the way for polyamory, beastiality, pedophilia, and people marrying their robots!

See this is the point they get when they’re REALLY reaching..

1. Polamory brings with it a whole host of legal complications. But other than legal logistics, I see no particular problem with polyamorous or swinging relationships. They already exist without the blessing of the state and I believe we should respect relationship-orientations (poly, mono, swinger, celibate, etc.) just as we should respect sexual orientations (gay, straight, bi).
2. Beastiality and pedophilia are illegal because the other partner (the child or the animal) does not have the developed reasoning ability to consent to sexual acts. Nor are they of legal age/mind to enter into any kind of contractual agreement. The sexual act of a human adult unto a child or an animal is done by either trickery/ coercing or flat out rape. Homosexuality is not about force, it is about choice.
3. I’ll entertain the robot question. Like the child or animal a robot cannot consent legally. It is not considered sentient or “life” and thus, cannot enter into a contract. Considering it is not alive, sex with said robot is not rape. If one day we live in a future where artificial intelligence reaches a level where it is sentient, emotive, conscious, adaptive and self aware, then the issue of marriage with said robot may be revisited. But i have a feeling this debate is a long long time off in the future, if it’ll ever arrive at all. This is a question for scifi novels, not political debate.

Why can’t they just have civil unions?

The same reason blacks don’t have their own water fountains. Separate but equal, is not equal. There are two solutions IMHO.

1. Everyone gets a civil union. I prefer this one. Marriage as a word implies personal/spiritual union. Civil Union implies a contract under government. They are not mutually exclusive. I would also prefer the government remove itself from as many religious or spiritual aspects of life as possible.
2. But as it currently stands the word marriage is used to represent BOTH the spiritual/personal union of a couple as well as the legal status of a couple. If one group gets “marriage” and the other gets “civil union”, to me that says that one group (the majority) dictates that marriages – even if only in title and symbolism, is somehow “better” than civil union. It’s a symbolic way of sating the “whiny gays and liberals” by giving them the technical rights and statuses, but using government to still thumb your nose at them and to act as if they’re way is still lesser in a symbolic way.

So.. imho, either both get civil unions, both get marriages, or no one gets anything. But either way, all should be treated equally.

But marriage, across cultures and throughout history has ALWAYS been like this!?

Umm, no it has not.

Rick Warren, the controversial evangelist Obama invited to speak at his inauguration, told Ann Curry in an NBC interview that, “For five thousand years, every single culture and every single religion has defined marriage as a man and a woman.” Psychology Today responds to this well here. But here’s the important part:

Two-spirited ones (formerly known as berdache) were commonly found in many Amerindian cultures. They were either biological males who felt the presence of a female soul so strongly that they choose to live their lives as women or vice-versa, females who choose to live as men. Pedro de Magalhães de Gandovo described such people—whom he called Amazons—in 1576: “The [women] wear their hair cut in the same way as the men, and go to war with bows and arrows and pursue game, always in company with men; each has a woman to serve her, to whom she says she is married, and they treat each other and speak with each other as man and wife.”

The Mosuo people of China practice a form of courtship and sexual interaction anthropologists have called “walking marriage,” which consists of women and men being completely free to sleep with whomever they like, children being cared for by the woman’s family—her brothers assuming all paternal responsibility. Biological paternity is a non-issue. Every night is seen as an independent event, with no expectation of permanence or even continuity in amorous relationships.

Among the Canela people of Brazil, “Virginity loss is only the first step into full marriage for a woman.” There are several other steps needed before the Canela society considers a couple to by truly married, including the young woman’s gaining social acceptance through her service in a “festival men’s society,” which includes sequential sex with fifteen to twenty members (no pun intended) and “the mother in law’s receipt of meat earned by the bride through extramarital sex” on a festival day.

Got that? Part of the marrying process is group sex followed by a gift to the mother-in-law-to-be of meat gained in exchange for gang-banging with men other than the husband-to-be.

But that’s the way I was raised!!!

For something a bit more metaphorical I suggest reading Shirley Jackson’s The Lottery. It’s a great short story about the idiocy of practicing traditions or holding on to traditional mindsets without questioning their modern usefulness.